| Poll |
| Vote! |
| This is great. I would totally play that. |
|
7% |
[ 4 ] |
| Mostly agree, some change are dumb. |
|
8% |
[ 5 ] |
| Bah LRB6 if fine, this is a waste of time. |
|
8% |
[ 5 ] |
| Mostly disagree, a lot of changes are dumb. |
|
52% |
[ 30 ] |
| You're dumb, please don't post anymore. |
|
22% |
[ 13 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 57 |
|
mdd31
Joined: Oct 23, 2014
|
 Posted:
Mar 10, 2016 - 16:16 |
 
|
Dach changes to the game should be made to improve it for everyone. All your changes do is improve the races you like to play while hurting those you do not enjoy. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
You've taken a bit of flack on these today. As someone who attempted this myself, I'll try and focus on the positives 
| Quote: |
Apothecaries
Roll D6:
1 No effect, injury apply.
2 Badly hurt and miss next game.
3 Badly hurt.
4-6 No injury, put the player in the in KO box.
(You can still use your Apo for a KO. Also to make badly hurt downgrade to KO. Same as LRB 6.)
|
I don't think your Apo idea is necessarily bad, though I do get bgh's point about the ability to return BHs to the field too. Maybe just make 4-6 No Injury, player moves to reserves box?
| Quote: |
Kick-off Table
2: Throw a rock
3: Get the Ref
11: Riot
|
I think the Kick-Off table needs some work, but don't think you've necessarily moved the right results around. I'd look to make the more game changing results less frequent.
| Quote: |
Touchback
No touchback awarded if a receiving player fail to catch the ball and result in the ball getting out of bound or in the kicking team half. |
I like this change. I think it perhaps needs 'tweaking' but I like it's intent. It's something I've thought about before, and I think it's something in the WhatRulebook too.
| Quote: |
Interception
Make throwing roll before interception roll. No interception roll if the thrower fumble.
|
This makes logical sense, so I support it in that regard. As people have said though the intercept first rule is to streamline the game, increase interceptions and results in less dice rolls. Not sure which way I prefer really.
| Quote: |
Decay
-1 to Regenaration roll. (No more double injury roll.)
|
I quite like this. Not the way I'd have done it, but I think it's a good change.
| Quote: |
Regeneration
[s]Change from extraordinary to mutation.[/s]
Succesfull regenaration roll put the player in the KO box.
|
I don't think the second part of this is a bad change at all. Would help to reduce the affect regen has on an attrition war.
| Quote: | Sneaky Git
Re-roll to armor roll or injury roll when you foul.
Stunty
Player with stunty ignore the tackle skill on adjacent player when they dodge. (A player with tackle blocking/blitzing a stunty player still cancel out his dodge skill.) |
I think your SG and Stunty changes are if anything a little too strong. SG would be foul-piling-on. Tackle not stopping dodge on Stunties would make skinks very good.
I don't really like the team changes, except no Loner on Trolls. I think Pact marauders could lose S access, but not without compensating them somewhere else.
One positive is that you've inspired me to give mine another visit, and I've added some rules changes that I'd previously steered away from. They're here if you wanted to take a look, and the thread is a little way down this page |
|
|
awambawamb
Joined: Feb 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2016 - 17:23 |
|
I think the poll results are worth more than 1000 pies.
also, the poll lacks pies. what's happening? nobody pointing out the lack of pie option?
ah, those youngsters... |
_________________
"la virtù sta nel cielo e nella terra, ma anche nelle nuvole e nelle stelle"
 |
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2016 - 18:23 |
|
| kilinrax wrote: | | Out of everything, this stands out as the least necessary: zombies are not in need of nerfing. |
From a fluff perspective Decay makes sense to me. If Decay wasn't so harsh I'd be in favour of it. Wouldn't drop to AG1 though.
| mister__joshua wrote: | | I think the Kick-Off table needs some work, but don't think you've necessarily moved the right results around. I'd look to make the more game changing results less frequent. |
I understand the sentiment behind this, as some events take away any hope you might have to win the match. Perfect D vs killer Nurgle is a complete nightmare for example. But my guess is that those "10 and 4" results are there to give the underdog a chance at turning over the drive, and maybe even to counteract "stall for the tie" and other boring play behaviours. The motivation is a good one, but execution in CRP isn't great. Personally I'd look at the root cause of the frustration on defense -- namely the cage. A well-executed cage is very difficult to crack, but should it be? Maybe we need another Leap-type skill for Strength players, Break Tackle doesn't quite cut it. Or other changes.
My point being that the OP has the right idea in many cases, which MJ correctly points out. Piling on the new guy isn't any fun to watch, although I'm sure it's a good time for the usual suspects. |
|
|
Dach
Joined: Dec 25, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 03:58 |
|
| kwèk wrote: | I don't get it?... Right now the APO downgrades BH to "reserve"... and gives you 50% chance of getting a reserve player? Now you change it to a KO... which makes it worst for the match (since you still have to have make a KO roll). Keeping a player on the field saving a KO is pretty usefull in tournament play, and having him stunned still keeps him out for at least a turn.
The entire idea of nerfing the APO in the first place was to get more injured players... and make it more difficult to create legends. Which in leagues that run long is not a bad thing at all. Also... making the APO worst got away with "ageing"... which most players (including myself) found a lot more frustrating then an APO fail.[/b] |
Read in the parenthese, the option using your Apo to downgrade KO to stun and badly hurt to KO is still there.
The new D6 Table is only for result worse than badly hurt. My bad if it wasn't clear.
Like I said answering to bghandras, I do get the bad this can do into tournament environment but IMO that's something tournament staff can handle with their own tournament rules.
Also you disagree with me buffing the the Apo but you want to nerf the CLMB combo, you want more casualty or less?!? I'm confused...
You also say I buff legend and long term player but my sneaky git is way more dangerous than the one we have now.
Also I didn't touch the CPOMB combo btw.
| kwèk wrote: | I think this is pure subjective...
The implications are minor, and just has to do what you like more. But I don't mind "throw a rock" on number 2 at all... it's pretty frustrating to see your important player die or go KO for a full drive, because of randomness.
Changing 3 to 11 doesn't really matter... it's more fluff wise I guess. Just changing 2 with 11 did make your point. |
Yep 3 to 11 is totally for fluff reason, usually the next step after a Riot should be a Pitch invasion. 
| kwèk wrote: | This I consder to be a really bad rule change. If the ball goes directly to the line of scrimage... and you don't catch the ball, the ball scatters to the opponent side (on a player), they don't catch the ball, ball scatters to the 2nd line of the opponent side... if the opponent has set up his players on line 3, it will be really difficult to recover the ball and the chances of starting a normal drive go trough the drain. I think the game is random enough without those situations to happen.
This can also result to several players in the wide zone not catching the ball, and the crowd passing the ball back deep in the opponents enzone... against Skaven or Wood Elves that could mean you start in defence and loose your drive completely. |
I get your point about the line of scrimage... will think more about it.
But for the sideline and widezone, first I never see anyone deploying player directly on the edge of those.
Second case is High Kick or Quick Snap which are "optionnal". This become a case of risk management like everything in blood bowl.
Do I try to catch the ball directly with the chance of the ball bouncing in the crowd or do I let it bounce normally and hope for a touchback?
For me it's more interesting than simply I get a free attempt at catch without any downside.
| kwèk wrote: | | I've always considered this to be more logical... I don't see a problem here. I don't know why the rule got introduced this way... maybe they had a reason back then? You should clarify with some of the people that tested the rules up until now, just to know why some rules got implemented. |
Well for me it's more logical, it doesn't add more dice roll... Yes, might result in less interception but that's another problem.
If we want more interception I would go for -1 to the agility roll for interception instead of the -2 we have now.
| kwèk wrote: | | I don't see why... if you wanna skill them, just make them score TD's or do other fancy stuff. They are kind of cheating annyway, shouldn't get rewarded (even tough the fans like it) |
Cause to be better at cheating, you need to cheat. Not play football.
Ball & chain are cheating too and they get rewarded for it, same with the Death roller.
| kwèk wrote: | I believe the decay rule should change... I'm just not sure if this is the way to go. Maybe just give them an automatically "nigling" injury (as in, they start with +1 on injury, and all SI(mng) give them a nigling.
(this means changing all 41, 42, 43, 44, ... , 48 results to nigling injury) |
Decay being +1 to Injury roll could work too. Good idea.
Don't have time to reply to the rest right now, will get to it later.
Thanks for the reply guys! |
|
|
Dach
Joined: Dec 25, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 05:34 |
|
| kwèk wrote: | | Why? ... And why put it in the KO box. I don't see a problem with regen in the current ruleset... but maybe I'm wrong. |
Because of the attrition war, which regen team currently win easily. Regen is currently like having an apo for each of your player instead of having only one.
Also regen team have access to the necro/nurgle plague rule which they don't even need to hire (free 50k compared to a apo. Also 50k TV less.)
| kwèk wrote: | I never took sneaky git... and pretty much considered it a way to random skill in the new ruleset. Rerolling armor and injury is just not done... except for Piling on. I don't think we need to have more of that. Maybe think of changing the sneaky git rule as:
"if you are catched by the ref, roll a D6, on a 1,2,3 the ref spots the foul as normal, on a 4+ the game continues and the referee doesn't spot the foul. If the Referee spots the foul on armour and injury (aka 2 doubles) sneaky git has no effect. (cause they are sneaky)" |
Well it is actually to equivalent of PO for agi/stunty team, that's totally my intent. Thought you can still get banned so it's not as good as PO is.
Sorry but your new idea of 4+ to prevent ban is not much better than the current skill. If it was that I wouldnt take that skill either... like you seem to do with the current one yourself.
| kwèk wrote: | | Believe me... this is not what you want. I also don't see anny reason why to change "stunty" , it's good as it is... I'm glad they changed the rule that 9 on injury is automatically BH, that was great. Thanks! If you want to change stunty teams, there are other things to consider then this. |
Hehe I know this one could be a bit OP. 
But playing stunty against Dwarf just feel like you are being hard-countered HARD.
I guess the buff of AV on Halfling and Snotling could be good instead.
| kwèk wrote: | | I'm not going to comment on the inducements... Don't really see why it's nescesary. I mean, not all the money has to be stuffed into inducements... if you have 10K or 20K left to spare, it's just like that. I don't see a reason to change it. |
No opinion on the 50k bribe for dwarf?
| kwèk wrote: | Why? ... Just why???
They have 2 types of lineman, 2 bull centaurs, and a mino (not the best of the big guys)... I don't see a big problem with the chaos dwarf team... why take away sprint?
Thralls really don't need thick skull... Vamps are really not that bad if you know how to play them.
Why would you change the stats of zombies? They have ag2 isn't that bad enough? Why go to ag1? There is no reason for it... they just have ma4. And why give them decay?
I also don't see why the rotters need to have -1 agility... just change the decay rule, and make it a bit less punishable. Casualties can go through the roof sometimes making it hard to play. |
Bull centaurs: Because they are OP. Just a quick comparison with the Chaos Warrior which is somewhat an equivalent being the S4 in a team which is filled with 2 type of linemans.
Warrior cost 100k, Bull 130k.
Bull get +1MA (+30k), -1AG (-40k), Sure feet (+30k), Sprint (+30k), Thick skull (+20k).
If you add up... 30+30+30+20-40 = 70k
So they are worth 70k more than the Warrior but you only pay 30k more for them.
Thrall: Vamps are still one of the worst team IMO, a small buff wouldn't hurt. Still it's probably the change I could care less about letting it go.
Zombie: Both change fit the fluff first, a zombie should have decay and a zombie should be as bad as a mommy to handle a football.
Rule-wise decay because of the attrition war I spoke earlier in the apo vs regen case.
-1 AG because I feel the skeleton is no match vs the zombie right now. I guess adding decay should do it, I know the -1AG is harsh. (Sorry Jarvish!)
Jarvish actually you team record is pretty good for a team of MA4 lineman. IMO just prove my point or you could be a blood bowl god. I don't know which it is really...
Rotters: Felt Nurgle is the king of the bash team and wanted them to feel the downside on the ball side of the play.
That's why the -1AG and giving them regen (with my new decay rule, which his less harsh) It reinforce their character of being king of bash but suck at ball play.
| kwèk wrote: | 3. Change the Take Root rule... When a treeman is rooted he can a roll a D6 in the beginning of the activation. On a 6 he unroots, on anny other number he stays rooted. Make sure Treeman roll their take root in the beginning of the activation but AFTER they stand up (if they have to stand up). Sometimes treemen are just rooted on the ground, I mean, wtf. Of course you can't chain push them.
Also make sure that a Blitz action can be changed to a block action, if the treeman takes root. Loosing your blitz is awfull, loosing the block also makes it even more terrible. |
I like the unroot on a 6 very much!
Same with rooted treeman should be considered like having a obligatory Stand Firm.
The lost blitz is fine with me, it's the same risk as blitzing with a Wild Animal/Very Stupid/Bonehead. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 09:22 |
|
Dach:
Bull centaurs do not have the skill access of a chaos warrior or anything else you'd likely compare them to. This isn't lrb4 or before anymore, and Bulls running around causing mayhem on the field only to do so for so long until they get cpombed into the ground. You may also only take a maximum of two bull centaurs (and they are "So OP" that you will find a lot of people take one, or even... there's been whisperings of "none"). You can pick four chaos warriors, and they are supported by a team of 6338 players (who are 6438 when they blitz), as well as a potential minotaur (who has mutation access). Bull centaurs are supported by up to 6 players who are 4329 (come with block/tackle/thick skull), and either then some 6337 players and again, the proverbial minotaur (who has different skill access here).
A wardancer is just as OP: 8347, blodge, leap. I don't you see you proposing to nerf them, despite the fact that you must be more than aware of how gamechanging they are since you (a) have an agi5 [edit3: my error, you have one agi5 and one ma9 agi5] and (b) started a wood elf team with no rerolls.
You're looking at things a little short-sightedly in my opinion - simply looking at skill costs of an individual player without considering team role, skill access, and the rest of the team isn't going to allow you a fair summary. Just doing what you did for the bull leads us to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with a chaos pact marauder, and that he may in fact be underpriced (which you clearly don't agree with because you wish to change his skill access).
I'm not trying to be unkind here, but it seems a lot of your changes are focused at high/mid-tv play (ie. 14/1500+) without consideration of lower tv play. Both in terms of how many people simply play lower tv exclusively, and how some of your changes would drastically effect people building up through lower tv to high tv.
Undead may be known for being rich and having loads of zombies if you play them to mid tv. But they're also known for being cpombed off the field at high tv, and your proposals simply would result in a lot of games where undead teams lost horribly because they had 7 players in the KO box for the second half instead of in reserves.
At low tv this would be even worse, because at low tv, the regenerative properties of the rest of the team is the only way that their relative lack of general skills (ie. block) allows them to compete with opponents. Ever played undead vs dorfs? It becomes a cat and mouse game of which blocks to throw and trying to steer dworfs into the tacklezones of the mummies, all the while hoping that if the dorfs do decide to just start 1ding everything you regenate. Once you lose a wight or Mummy it is almost over.
I don't really mind changing decay - it's an awful mechanic on tomb guardians, but adding it elsewhere is, again, a big nerf, even in downgraded form.
Giving rotters regeneration alongside this new decay actually boosts high tv nurgle btw - nobody uses rotters for ball handling once they have a pestigor. All you achieve with that change is solidifying the position of the rotter as "pure fodder", and actually increasing their longevity.
[edit] I don't know why you think Dwarves need cheaper bribes either. The tractor is a team choice that the coach can consider for himself, and at the moment the 100k bribe vs 70k extra longbeard is a quite reasonable dilemma for him to consider. Dwarves also have absolutely no problems amassing a large amount of wealth.
[edit2] Since you seem to have missed it: by moving regen to mutations instead of extraordinary abilities, you do in fact change CPOMB. Because now that chaos warrior/beastman/chaos dwarf (who gets doubles)/All of Underworld can all pick regeneration too! |
_________________
Last edited by ArrestedDevelopment on %b %11, %2016 - %11:%Mar; edited 3 times in total |
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 09:30 |
|
No |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
kwèk
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 10:17 |
|
| Dach wrote: |
Read in the parenthese, the option using your Apo to downgrade KO to stun and badly hurt to KO is still there.
The new D6 Table is only for result worse than badly hurt. My bad if it wasn't clear.
Like I said answering to bghandras, I do get the bad this can do into tournament environment but IMO that's something tournament staff can handle with their own tournament rules.
Also you disagree with me buffing the the Apo but you want to nerf the CLMB combo, you want more casualty or less?!? I'm confused...
You also say I buff legend and long term player but my sneaky git is way more dangerous than the one we have now.
Also I didn't touch the CPOMB combo btw.
|
Apo downgrads BH to “reserve†… just so you know.
Your D6 table mainly comes from the complaint that the apothecary is not doing it’s business. Now the Apo still saves people from being permanently injured 60% of the time. Which is not that bad. And it can be a useful tool to win a game at a key moment by keeping a KO on the pitch. Is it worst then the old one… yes and no… depends on how you use it.
BTW, what do you base yourself on to change the rules? Did you do the math? Or is it just a general disappointment of seeing your big players go “squish†over time? I think if it’s the last part, then it’s better to change the rule that the apothecary works every time… since I remember playing against people in LRB 4.0 when the apo trew a 1, and they went “aaarg, that guy never works.â€. The complaints about the apothecary will probably keep going on as long as there is a chance that it can fail, because most people are emotionally invested in some of their players.
The problem with making APO’s better, is that the chances of actually loosing big players becomes really low. Creating big legendary teams, and creating problems in league play. The entire idea behind loosing big players, is that these problems don’t occur. And why (before this ruleset) Ageing was introduced.
And yes… I want to nerf the Claw, MB, PO shenanigans, cause it creates less tense games… The Apothercary won’t save you from 5 or 6 players that picked up the combo or part of the combo. It’s not really “fun†to go into the second half with 7 players left, against a full team… just because armour and injury rolls are insane in the first half. The point of nerfing or changing the rules would be to benefit the game, and the experience to something… and hopefully “less random†more “tacticâ€.
I think you should have touched the MB, Claw, Piling On Combo… it’s in need of more attention then the Zombies for that matter. LOL
I also find your remark funny about tournament organizers needing to change the rules as they see fit? … You were talking about making a new LRB right? And not about making house rules? Cause your comment slightly suggests that your house rules should be the LRB… And that tournament organisers that don’t agree with your dictate need to change their rules as they see fit? Ussually… the rules of the LRB are there for everyone, and then people like you can change stuff if they believe it’s cool, try it out, and maybe come back at it later if you see it doesn’t work.
| Dach wrote: |
I get your point about the line of scrimage... will think more about it.
But for the sideline and widezone, first I never see anyone deploying player directly on the edge of those.
Second case is High Kick or Quick Snap which are "optionnal". This become a case of risk management like everything in blood bowl.
Do I try to catch the ball directly with the chance of the ball bouncing in the crowd or do I let it bounce normally and hope for a touchback?
For me it's more interesting than simply I get a free attempt at catch without any downside.
|
Again… it’s not because you never seen anyone deploy players, that it never happens. The rules should not be based on your personal ideas, but on ideas that can be implemented “for allâ€.
Let’s discuss other things that can happen if you implement the “no touchback ruleâ€.
1. Ball can go out in In your endzone… crowd trows it to the (out of the field), crowd trows it deep in your opponents field.
2. Some players will decide to put the ball on the line of scrimmage of the receiving team… then you have a 3/8 chance to have the ball go into your own field all the time.
… these scenarios are not going to benefit the game… since you are taking away the “drive†from a player. It’s worst enough that you get “blitzed†from time to time…. In your ruleset you don’t even need “blitz†, You just loose the opportunity to have a drive, since the ball has a big chance getting into your opponents hands before you even start your drive.
It’s worst enough that some teams can’t handle a ball in their backfield (hence kick) you are giving them the opportunity to loose their ball and loose their drive by just putting a ball on the line of scrimmage for kicking.
| Dach wrote: |
Because of the attrition war, which regen team currently win easily. Regen is currently like having an apo for each of your player instead of having only one.
Also regen team have access to the necro/nurgle plague rule which they don't even need to hire (free 50k compared to a apo. Also 50k TV less.)
|
Yeah, it’s their strength… and their game plan. Can also go seriously wrong sometimes, since regen is also pretty random.
Most of the players that are regenerating are just a nuisance anyway, and nothing to be feared to much… they do help the team get by. I don’t see your problems with this honestly. Have you had some kind of traumatizing experience with zombies? They are 4 3 2 8 … They shamble around, and create blocks, and most players pray they hit the 4+ for the important dodge if that scenario ever comes up.
A Norse lineman has 6 3 3 7 , Block … even a 6 3 3 8, Horns beastmen is tactically better then a zombie. The only thing zombies do better… is that they come back. Cause it’s their thing. If you start nerfing the zombie? What’s going to be the next frustration we are going to talk about? Removing the horns on the beastmen? Cause they don’t need assistance to blitz on most players? It’s so unfair? … In the end you end up with giving everyone the same lineman 6 3 3 8 for everyone. YAY.
| Dach wrote: |
Sorry but your new idea of 4+ to prevent ban is not much better than the current skill. If it was that I wouldnt take that skill either... like you seem to do with the current one yourself.
|
No it’s not…
Right now you get thrown out if you break armor and throw a double on either Injury or Armor. If you have sneaky git. And it prevents you from being thrown out if you don’t break armor yet make a double. The intention was to have sneaky players make random fouls without having to much assistance, or getting thrown out on a random 1,1 result.
Annyway… if a guy fouls alone, sneaky git works on a 1,1 ; 2,2 result that’s 2/36
If you are not fouling on a snotling 3,3 will also work (3/36)
If you are not fouling on av8+ 4,4 is also going to work. (4/36)
If you break armour, and still trow a double, sneaky git will never work.
Just saying that the impact is to small to make an investment of 20K or a double choice of 30K for taking it.
If you would try what I suggest … sneaky git would work 50% of the time on anny foul that is not a double armor + double injury (even when you break armor) … (I believe the chance of that happening is 1/36, but could be wrong).
If you already have a DP … Sneaky git could make it a lot better.
The only thing that I should do is the math… and see how many times the skill would save someone… since you don’t want to get in “fouling paradise†… like in the old ruleset. Back then if you had eye on you, you already had a 50% chance of getting off the pitch, so maybe what I’m suggesting is stronger then that rule. I’m not sure, I’m not a math-person. But I do believe sneaky git should be handled if there is ever a LRB update.
| Dach wrote: |
But playing stunty against Dwarf just feel like you are being hard-countered HARD.
I guess the buff of AV on Halfling and Snotling could be good instead.
|
I’m sorry man… but I truly believe you have no idea what you are talking about. And this is a general misinterpretation of people that don’t play stunties a lot… that if you play against dwarves you have like an “instant loss†on your hands.
I don’t consider myself to be a good coach… I believe my stats speak for themselves. I’m pretty mediocre. But I’m experienced, and I know something about stunties. In the NAF tournament environment… I’ve been running my Halflings over 200 games now. And it’s my experience that I rather see “dwarves†popping up, then “lizardmen†for example.
Depending on the stunty race… and the weakness of their roster, they prefer certain races more then others. But I believe most stunty players don’t really care facing dwarves on the pitch. It’s usually the more experienced better players with dwarves that get the better of you. Most games against dwarves with stunties end up in a draw, or a win… it’s just the really good coaches that win.
The reason? Because of the movement value… positioning is everything. You don’t really care how much flings they beat up… if you are 2-0 ahead, or 1-1 deep in the 2nd half… the chances are looking really good for you. It’s just a noob mistake thinking that dwarves are rough on the win percentage for stunties. It really depends on the experience of the coach.
Same idea goes for “amazons†vs “dwarvesâ€. There was a time on here that amazons players played dwarves for fun… (I even remember the longbeard Halfling challenge for that matter). Because you can win the game… one mistake of the dwarf coach, and you are hopping for that TD.
The only reasons people avoid dwarves in the “ranked†system… is because they are afraid to have their team butchered. Which happens quite a lot. Winning 2-1 is not difficult against dwarves, just depends on the coaches… but having some players net for the next game is… pinning longbeards just is a big sacrificial move against a team that naturally takes Mighty Blow and has “block and tackle†… not really friends of anny stunty player (since they can’t take block).
The only reason why I suggest an AV increase on both snotlings + halflings is because of the math.
For a halflings 7 to break armour + 7 to get off the pitch… it almost feels like “bad luck†when a little guy doesn’t go out after throwing the dice.
For a snotling 6 to break armour + 7 to go off the pitch … is even worst.
But it’s still dice… and this creates random results. In some instances you will have no players left after 4 or 5 turns. Sometimes they just seem to be unbreakable till turn 7 2nd half.
But my experiences teaches me… they ALWAYS break. It’s just not “fun†to have the first thing happening in a lot of games. Cause it also has nothing to do with your tactics.
A fling failing an early dodge, can be terrible against a good opponent… since it leaves a lot of your players in “blocking positionâ€. Even failing a “blitz†or “ block†to free up flings, keeps them in a blocking a position. Every block has a big potential to get a fling of the field. And you can’t really tactic your way out of unlucky failure… Flings and snotlings just get punished really hard for having 1 unlucky action… they get punished a lot more then other teams.
Next to that, the unlucky action also has a good percentage of getting the Halfling/snotling off the field, since you break armour in more then 50% of the cases.
I need to do 1 GFI , oh, there goes the Halfling of the field
I do a 2d get Block/pow ; skull results , … yep their he goes
… oh wait, now it’s my opponent turns and I couldn’t save my other flings because my first action fails, well, …. There is a good chance they will be going away too.
You can’t be tactical and save yourself from all of this… it’s just, when a Halfling turn goes wrong (or a snotling fails first dodge) they don’t only loose their turn, they have a good chance of losing the game after all the blocks your opponent is able to do. Just believe this random factor needs to be cut down a little bit. That’s all, which makes a bigger of numbers of games a bit more interesting then just pushing your turnmarker one square forward.
| Dach wrote: |
No opinion on the 50k bribe for dwarf?
|
I just don’t see why dwarves would need that… they bring enough pain as it is. I really don’t believe you need to get “soft†on dwarves. The team is fine… and in the hands of someone that knows how to exploit them, they are just terrifying. Luckely for all of us, a lot of people are not “dwarf coaches†(meaning they play dwarves, but don’t know what to do with them). An inexperienced dwarf coach usually only wins when all armor+inj rolls go their way in the beginning of the game, else they just get outmaneuvered. If they want to keep that deathroller on the pitch (which they really don’t need to win), let them dig up some gold from their mines and pay for it. Most players play without deathroller anyway, and letting dwarves with lots of MB foul more easily is just not a world I want to be a part of.
There is a lot of feeling in your next part. I don’t want to go in on your feelings… I don’t believe feelings should belong to much in rulemaking, legislation or politics if they don’t have a scientific rational explanation to it. I don’t see a reason to change chaos dwarves, rotters, zombies etc…
Vampires are also doing just fine, and are really not that bad… most people are just really bad with them, blame the player not the team. They are also not meant to be a tier 1 team, and I don’t want every team to be tier 1… Vampires are a challenge and people that play well with them are doing just fine. I think most of them are happy that the BH rule got implied and the vamps are not killing their thralls anymore.
Vampires / Stunties are just more random then the other teams… that’s why they are there. I don’t want the teams to evolve to a point where they are like “undead†or “wood elves†… But as long as the team has an AV that comes really close to AV7 I’m fine with it.
Next to that… Ag2 for ball handeling, dodging, and doing things… is worst enough. The fact they also have a movement value of 4 and 5 is even worst. Just look at khemri, they have AG2 and sure hands… and sometimes still can’t pick up the ball in an entire half…
I’m not even talking when it starts raining… cause weather conditions are just harsh on somet teams, while others just shake them off.
| Dach wrote: |
Jarvish actually you team record is pretty good for a team of MA4 lineman. IMO just prove my point or you could be a blood bowl god. I don't know which it is really..
|
No… he just knows how to play, has more experience then you.
He’s a better player… no worries, just play more and you’ll get better too… I think the lack of experience also makes you say things that annoys people in this topic… hence the poll results telling you to keep it down a little. Or the more friendly once that largely disagree with you.
| Dach wrote: |
Same with rooted treeman should be considered like having a obligatory Stand Firm.
|
They already have the obligatory stand firm when rooted…
I think you should give it a rest… and just play for another 8 years, then come back and give it another try if you have a bit more experience. And if you really want to convince anyone, do the math too… At least then you are calculating on the stuff you are proposing and see if it’s reasonable.
I’m still amazed you are attacking zombies, but don’t want to touch the claw / MB / PO combo… which most experienced players now a days are having difficulty coping with. |
_________________
It is a bit embarrassing to have been concerned with the human problem all one's life and find at the end that one has no more to offer by way of advice than 'try to be a little kinder'.
~Aldous Huxley~ |
|
Matthueycamo
Joined: May 16, 2014
|
 Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 10:46 |
|
| Quote: | | it's pretty frustrating to see your important player die or go KO for a full drive, because of randomness |
It's not random. You pissed off Nuffle. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 10:53 |
|
"Like I said answering to bghandras, I do get the bad this can do into tournament environment but IMO that's something tournament staff can handle with their own tournament rules. "
I think at least part of my concern is misunderastood. I dont mean tournaments at all. What i think is that there are monster teams, and too many loopside games to my liking. The former could be handled by more death and perms, and the latter could be handled by less overall injury and ko.
So my thinking is not to increase the number of KO's and BH's and decrease the number of perms, but the contrary. I would not mind if all injury would be serious, but the number of injuries would happen less frequently. |
_________________
 |
|
jarvis_pants
Joined: Oct 30, 2008
|
| Dach wrote: |
Jarvish you could be a blood bowl god. |
Ahh its a shame your ideas are so bad when your so right about certain things. |
_________________
"May Nuffle have mercy on your rolls." - St.Basher |
|
kilinrax
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2016 - 14:05 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | | One positive is that you've inspired me to give mine another visit, and I've added some rules changes that I'd previously steered away from. They're here if you wanted to take a look, and the thread is a little way down this page |
Each time I read this, it gets better. Bravo.
EDIT: Still not sure I'd play a Chaos Dwarf roster though, without M access. Though I salute the removal of tacklespam. |
|
|
Dach
Joined: Dec 25, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 12, 2016 - 06:26 |
|
Big thank for the answer, especially to Kwek for the lenghty answer, I appreciate.
Lots of food for thought |
|
|
Pablets
Joined: Nov 02, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 24, 2016 - 12:53 |
|
| Dach wrote: | Bored at work so... 
Those are mostly minor change, I don't like making too much complicated change.
Apothecaries
Roll D6:
1 No effect, injury apply.
2 Badly hurt and miss next game.
3 Badly hurt.
4-6 No injury, put the player in the in KO box.
(You can still use your Apo for a KO. Also to make badly hurt downgrade to KO. Same as LRB 6.)
Kick-off Table
2: Throw a rock
3: Get the Ref
11: Riot
Touchback
No touchback awarded if a receiving player fail to catch the ball and result in the ball getting out of bound or in the kicking team half.
Interception
Make throwing roll before interception roll. No interception roll if the thrower fumble.
SPPs
+1 SPP for injury made with a chainsaw, bomb or stab skill.
Decay
-1 to Regenaration roll. (No more double injury roll.)
Regeneration
Change from extraordinary to mutation.
Succesfull regenaration roll put the player in the KO box.
Sneaky Git
Re-roll to armor roll or injury roll when you foul.
Stunty
Player with stunty ignore the tackle skill on adjacent player when they dodge. (A player with tackle blocking/blitzing a stunty player still cancel out his dodge skill.)
Inducements
0-2 Freelancer assistant coach for 20k
0-2 Freelancer cheerleader for 20k
0-2 Igor
Dwarf get bribe for 50k.
Chaos Dwarf
Remove sprint on the Bull centaurs.
Goblin
Remove Loner from the Trolls.
Necromantic
Zombie gain Decay, Lose 1 AG.
Nurgle
Rotter gain Regeneration, lose 1 AG.
Undead
Zombie gain Decay, Lose 1 AG.
Vampire
Thrall gain Thick skull.
Chaos Pact
Marauder access to Strenght skill change from normal to double.
That's it! Discuss!  |
In general good ideas.
Apothecaries= Yes
Kick-off Table= Maybe.
Touchback= Maybe.
Interception= Yes
SPPs= Yes
Decay= Yes
Regeneration= Yes
Sneaky Git= Yes
Stunty= Not.
Chaos Dwarf= Not
Goblin= Not
Necromantic= Maybe.
Nurgle= Maybe.
Undead = Maybe.
Vampire = Not.
Chaos Pact =Yes
That's it! Discuss! Wink |
|
|
|
|
| |
All Star Bowl!
Search
